IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Robert D. Lewis, :

 Plaintiff, :

 v. : Case No. 2:12-cv-0490

Commissioner of Social : JUDGE MICHAEL H. WATSON

 Security, Magistrate Judge Kemp

 :

Defendant. 

 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On September 25, 2014, the Court issued a Report and

Recommendation and Order pertaining to Plaintiff’s application

for fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The Court

determined that Plaintiff was entitled to fees, but noted some

flaws in the calculation of the appropriate hourly rates, and

also made some adjustments in the hours claimed. That Order gave

the parties fourteen days either to agree on the rates reflected

in the Order or to submit additional documentation. Plaintiff

has since stipulated to those rates and waived any further

supplementation of the record. The Commissioner has not

responded at all.

Technically, if the parties did not stipulate to the hourly

rates set forth in the Court’s order, it was Plaintiff’s burden

to come forward with evidence supporting them. The calculation

of those rates was, however, based on other orders issued by this

Court in similar situations, and the Court is persuaded of their

accuracy. It will therefore adopt those rates and recommend a

fee award of $15,151.87, plus costs, although the Commissioner

may object to the rate determination as part of any objections to

this Report and Recommendation. If that occurs, Plaintiff would

be well-advised to supplement the record as part of any response.

Case: 2:12-cv-00490-MHW-TPK Doc #: 21 Filed: 10/14/14 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
For all of the reasons set forth in the prior Report and

Recommendation and Order (Doc. 19) and this Report and

Recommendation, it is recommended that the Plaintiff’s motion for

an award of fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 12)

be granted in substantial part. Plaintiff should be awarded fees

in the amount of $15,151.87 plus costs in the amount of $368.87,

for a total award of $15,520.74.

PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS

 If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that

party may, within fourteen days of the date of this Report, file

and serve on all parties written objections to those specific

proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made,

together with supporting authority for the objection(s). A judge

of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those

portions of the report or specified proposed findings or

recommendations to which objection is made. Upon proper

objections, a judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify,

in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein,

may receive further evidence or may recommit this matter to the

magistrate judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1).

 The parties are specifically advised that failure to object

to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the

right to have the district judge review the Report and

Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the

right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the

Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140

(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir.1981).

/s/ Terence P. Kemp 

United States Magistrate Judge

-2-

Case: 2:12-cv-00490-MHW-TPK Doc #: 21 Filed: 10/14/14 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>